Re: [netmod] YANG 1.0 behavior for leafref
Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Wed, 16 September 2015 02:44 UTC
Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 262C41B31D6 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:44:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LUbBwKROs00G for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:44:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-f169.google.com (mail-lb0-f169.google.com [209.85.217.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 651A21B31C7 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:44:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lbcao8 with SMTP id ao8so95672812lbc.3 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=CaZCq1vqhJDweQY1doSHLnTG9y6BUgEFtXAbwmDn80c=; b=XH715z8249ZUXEJR0apTRIGlTkzjkd9gkVX2xLt/EvmAiHUnsnOK7njDXpHtEpg/Vq FHCXRwG2FhwpnWW9yUSGiwXRzchargBbaKTqQX0UT1R3fV/jbNr90aNu9DUEhj8o6huU Q7Omm3cCld021qdV2+Q6uiV6iwvqgiU/B6XPIweb0wCkRJo7OUaVHdvGt99jdEnhiSzj K1osBXIBACU8x6B4PURCFTVVKFv5pafe0Iq9cibtJOM1moX5PNsDdQlx4dwkh4CiPUYI GycLdKUYFKMzAe0vOk0abw9C0vLBCdd+BV7reXrgYX+hBABVOnktfwe/VEe/Z/oV26Ko NtcA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkHs/RSzibVAIkY1EaUkP2vWNI+GNLa1xvFoRwHlS0zlTX46IujdLlgHu0Y0PwpJrE8+6ZX
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.179.40 with SMTP id dd8mr545282lac.119.1442371447290; Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.200.104 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAJK7ZqJkdpNkD4xQG44RH1XZBhV=AKYBJD-waiZ=_g+Ao5JxVA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABCOCHSAjtm5fO2OZWiYZvfYmLAjQ6ZdO3q-bTu41=Yv=y8k3Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAJK7ZqJkdpNkD4xQG44RH1XZBhV=AKYBJD-waiZ=_g+Ao5JxVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:44:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHR8dpB70yFrgaFPsFLqAEBJXTu3ZNSQuE9LKWWMcQpu6Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
To: Anees Shaikh <aashaikh@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113433eec01bd6051fd445c2"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/_ueSDsQqERGB07WRj4rdUC--RJw>
Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG 1.0 behavior for leafref
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 02:44:11 -0000
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Anees Shaikh <aashaikh@google.com> wrote: > Isn't there already a verified errata for this same issue with the same > recommendation (Errata ID: 2949) ? > > yes -- sorry for bringing it up. I should have checked there first. -- Anees > Andy > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> The leafref text was changed to allow the require-instance-stmt in YANG >> 1.1 >> >> RFC 6020, sec. 9.9. is quite clear that this sub-statement is not allowed. >> >> 9.9.1. Restrictions >> >> A leafref cannot be restricted. >> >> 9.13.1. Restrictions >> >> An instance-identifier can be restricted with the "require-instance" >> statement (Section 9.13.2). >> >> >> However, the ABNF on page 149 clearly contradicts the text in 9.9.1: >> >> leafref-specification = >> ;; these stmts can appear in any order >> path-stmt stmtsep >> [require-instance-stmt stmtsep] >> >> path-stmt = path-keyword sep path-arg-str stmtend >> >> require-instance-stmt = require-instance-keyword sep >> require-instance-arg-str stmtend >> >> >> >> So which normative text is correct? >> Is instance-required-stmt allowing in YANG 1.0? >> >> >> Andy >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >> >> >
- [netmod] YANG 1.0 behavior for leafref Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] YANG 1.0 behavior for leafref Anees Shaikh
- Re: [netmod] YANG 1.0 behavior for leafref Andy Bierman